[Closed] Have an opinion on the driving test...?

Nothing wrong with the test, they just need to make people retake it on a regular basis. Shall we say every five years?

Rachel

First improvement: Make Yoofs take the test accompanied by 4 of their mates squeezed in the back, taking the piss and burning holes in the upholstery...

Nothing wrong with the test, they just need to make people retake it on a regular basis. Shall we say every five years?

Yep, why not? and a year after first passing the test.

My apologies of it's a bit misleading btw - it's not really a free for all. Which is a shame but there would probably be a load of bonkers replies like everyone needs to ride a bike for a day or somesuch... 😛

Stepped licensing.
Time periods necessary before moving up, etc.
Longer training period with classroom, off road and mechanical before they ever get near the road!

Ask one of the two vehicle safety questions while on the move instead of at the start of the test, for example requiring candidates to show how they would operate the rear heated screen while driving.

What a load of crap, why not teach them something useful like how to drive on the motorway instead of how to press a button on the dash 🙄

And following sat navs in the driving test, could they possibly dumb it down anymore than that 😕

If these new suggestions are anything to go by they'll soon be testing people on how to safely write a text message whilst sitting in the outside lane of and empty dual carriageway, or how to correctly sit at a set of traffic lights for a lengthy period with your foot on the brake because pulling the handbrake up is far too difficult 😆

How to text without any spelling mistakes whilst driving?

Driverless cars are almost here, no more sitting in endless queues, nose to tail driving and other such shite! Hell even rip off cabbies will be out of a job!

Nothing wrong with the test, they just need to make people retake it on a regular basis. Shall we say every five years?

Rachel

I'd agree with that. The issue isn't the standard you have to meet to pass the test, it's the lack of any other check for the next 70 years of your driving 'career'.

And following sat navs in the driving test, could they possibly dumb it down anymore than that

Driverless cars are almost here, no more sitting in endless queues, nose to tail driving

Yep, I'm waiting for driverless cars - removing the idiot behind the wheel (or rather just removing the wheel) is the best way forward.....

And following sat navs in the driving test, could they possibly dumb it down anymore than that

Back when I did my test, shortly after the last Ice Age, the examiner told me where to go. I mean, how dumbed down is that, being given directions?!1!

Compulsory retests every, what, ten years even would be a big step forward. That and a motorway section.

[i]Nothing wrong with the test, they just need to make people retake it on a regular basis. Shall we say every five years?[/i]

Yer, great idea - now imagine that you've just failed it.

Can you not drive home, maybe loose your job (lets say you're a Policeman and drive for a living), car not insured anymore? And do you know how long the waiting lists are to take your test now - lad I work with has just booked his, for November, first option.

It's not that simple, plus the costs will be huge, for all of us - having put 3 kids thru their tests in the last few years...

Can you not drive home, maybe loose your job (lets say you're a Policeman and drive for a living),

If you drive for a living and have just failed your test after driving regularly for several years, frankly, I want you off the road before you kill someone. Safety has to trump driving privilege surely?

Back to L-plates and learner restrictions, I'd imagine?

do you know how long the waiting lists are to take your test now

There'd have to be a huge increase in infrastructure, of course.

Longer training period with classroom, off road and mechanical before they ever get near the road!

And make all of these more onerous tasks that [i]they[/i] have to to do applicable retrospectively too. If we're to put new drivers under higher levels of scrutiny than we faced ourselves then we'll of course all be willing to have our outdated licenses suspended until we've also jumped over the higher bar we think everyone else should be able to clear.

(searches for tongue in cheek emoticon)

Where do I start?

1. The importance of car maintenance - ie understanding why a car needs to be serviced and basics such as demonstrating how to check tyre depth and pressure, how to change a wheel, how to check oil and washer fluid, wiper blades etc. If you are going to drive a car you should be able to check it is safe, if you can't then no licence.

2. Real parking, not this massive unrealistic test space size.

3. Motorway test. I think it's madness that we allow people on motorways without any formal motorway education/testing.

4. Test renewals. Would also create quite a few jobs as testing instructors.

I quite like the addition of driving with sat nav as it's an extra thing to think about and so many people go to crap behind the wheel when following sat nav.

Can you not drive home, maybe loose your job (lets say you're a Policeman and drive for a living)

this is one of the strongest arguments FOR compulsory retests. If you drive for a living and you're not able to pass the test then you shouldn't have that job. (I've seen some bloody awful police driving recently!)

someone on here once did the maths / costs of regular retests for all. It was huge - 5 years definitely not feasible and 10 years probably optimistic too. But I agree with it in principle...

Nothing wrong with the test, they just need to make people retake it on a regular basis. Shall we say every five years?

Yer, great idea - now imagine that you've just failed it.

You get a rectification period. eg 3 months to get some training and re-take within that 3 months. Failure to do so = no licence.

1. The importance of car maintenance - ie understanding why a car needs to be serviced and basics such as demonstrating how to check tyre depth and pressure, how to change a wheel, how to check oil and washer fluid, wiper blades etc. If you are going to drive a car you should be able to check it is safe, if you can't then no licence.

So no licence for wheelchair users, then.

Fairly sure that identifying where fluids go was part of my test. Been a while though, could be wrong.

You get a rectification period. eg 3 months to get some training and re-take within that 3 months.

Yeah, that's a good shout.

First step, stop calling it a driving test and make it a Road Use Test. There are so many arguments about who's fault it is, when it's usually the fault of the person using the road regardless of vehicle. Whether it's the driver who thinks they pay their imagined tax so they own the road, or the cyclist\pedestrian who thinks it's someone elses job to look out for their safety.

First step would be to start in schools on how to behave as a pedestrian and cyclist and start to educate about how road use works.

I don't agree with the 5 year retests but do agree with regular eyesight and medical tests for all drivers and rather than wait to 70 for a re-application, perhaps a lower age of 40 or 50 following a medical.

Retests for all commercial\professional vehicle drivers definitely.

More licence restrictions so a licence only covers certain engine sizes or Horse Power before you must take a test to add a category, pass in a Fiesta and then have the ability to get into any car seems ridiculous given the huge variation in size and power of cars.

Take away bands from older licences, I got mine at a time when it was OK to pass and then get into a 7.5 ton panel van with trailer and set off. I'd be sh!t at driving a 7.5 ton panel van. There's a whole list of allowed categories I would dream of thinking I'd be competant at down the back of my licence.

Problem always comes down to the cash and administration. It's easier to have a simpler system.

So no licence for wheelchair users, then.

Fairly sure that identifying where fluids go was part of my test. Been a while though, could be wrong.

Why can't they go around the car in a wheel chair and check the tyres are in good condition? Why can't they understand why a car needs servicing? Can they not ask someone to check the oil if they can't reach? Granted, changing a wheel might be a step to far, although I have seen what the H4H rally team mechanic can do with no legs I am not suggesting they go changing a gearbox in a tent in a muddy service area 😉

It is "touched on" but not really driven home. Most people are bloody useless at checking anything.

I don't know, I'd probably rely on the people who's job it is to set such things decide on how to do it based on years of data considering the changing requirements of driving in an ever increasingly busy road network, rather than the knee-jerk reaction of people who've already passed and invariably want to to be harder (now they don't have to do it).

Given we live in an age of Brexit and "Sitcom of the Century" Mrs. Brown's Boys I've rediscovered the love for letting experts and elected officials decide what's best for us, we can't be trusted with anything.

More licence restrictions so a licence only covers certain engine sizes or Horse Power before you must take a test to add a category, pass in a Fiesta and then have the ability to get into any car seems ridiculous given the huge variation in size and power of cars.

Insurance pretty much dictates that anyway to an extent, but yeah, I can't see how that wouldn't work when it's what we've done with bikes for years.

Why can't they understand why a car needs servicing? (etc)

MOTs are a legal requirement so it gets checked for road-worthiness annually anyway, the only real check from a safety standpoint is tyres I suppose. If the car is safe but about to run out of oil and commit enginecide, it's their own silly fault.

I do agree to an extent, it'd be nice if folk generally had a bit more mechanical sympathy (the number of people I see pulling out of parking spaces at walking pace with the engine revving its gaskets off is truly staggering), but I'm not really seeing it as an essential part of the driving test.

Take away bands from older licences, I got mine at a time when it was OK to pass and then get into a 7.5 ton panel van with trailer and set off. I'd be sh!t at driving a 7.5 ton panel van. There's a whole list of allowed categories I would dream of thinking I'd be competant at down the back of my licence.

Same with trailers. My dad can drive a 7.5T vehicle and a trailer up to 3.5T.

I have been driving farm trailers for the last 5 years up to my 3.5/4.2T limit and need to apply for my B+E to so I can get a larger tow car and trailer but when I see how some people tow I am mortified. Nose weights too high, going too fast, overloaded trailers, unable to manoeuvre. The lack of any training, or a knowing it and ignorance to it, is disturbing.

I just wish it was cheaper to get training for a C and C+E as I would rather go straight for those instead of wasting time doing B+E which I would automatically get following C+E.

So no licence for wheelchair users, then.

The importance of car maintenance - ie understanding why a car needs to be serviced and basics such as demonstrating how to check tyre depth and pressure, how to change a wheel, how to check oil and washer fluid, wiper blades etc.

Fairly sure that identifying where fluids go was part of my test.

Given we live in an age of Brexit and "Sitcom of the Century" Mrs. Brown's Boys I've rediscovered the love for letting experts and elected officials decide what's best for us, we can't be trusted with anything.

Wise words 🙂

Handy for the people using the roads to pass on experiences for the experts to have extra data to run through.
Often thinks it's odd building up stats based on reported accidents. The unreported near misses seem just as important to identifying stupid road use.

MOTs are a legal requirement so it gets checked for road-worthiness annually anyway, the only real check from a safety standpoint is tyres I suppose. If the car is safe but about to run out of oil and commit enginecide, it's their own silly fault.

You seem to fall into the very category of people who my comments are aimed at 😉

MOT is a legal requirement but so is making sure your car is roadworthy at any time it is on the road. You can be driving round for 11 months with an unroadworthy car in between MOTs. Also servicing is about keeping the car running well and not causing excessive and unnecessary pollution, being less likely to break down (how many motorway accidents are caused by breakdowns?) and how many people buy a second hand car that has not been maintained and then get stung for lots of bills? Not maintaining a car is irresponsible and dangerous. I think there needs to be an attitude change away from doing the bare minimum to make sue you meet the bare requirements of the law (MOT every 12 months).

A good example is how many people drive around with headlights or brake lights out. they may do so for 11 months unil it comes up on the MOT. I had a house mate who I kept telling to fix his headlight. One evening the other side blew and he was stuck with only sidelights or full beam.

Where do I start?

1. The importance of car maintenance - ie understanding why a car needs to be serviced and basics such as demonstrating how to check tyre depth and pressure, how to change a wheel, how to check oil and washer fluid, wiper blades etc. If you are going to drive a car you should be able to check it is safe, if you can't then no licence.

2. Real parking, not this massive unrealistic test space size.

or the cyclist\pedestrian who thinks it's someone elses job to look out for their safety.

When I'm in my car it IS my responsibility to watch out for the safety of pedestrians and cyclists. I'm the one putting other people in danger.

Do away with it and add driving to the school curriculum. It's one of the easier tasks you learn in life and any 5 year old should be able to master it in a couple of days.

All a bit late as cars won't need drivers by the time 5 years olds leave school.

People moan about how bad Spanish drivers apparently are.
Go and try and see if you'll pass the driving test there...
Classroom - minimum number of classes and an exam covering everything from road signs to mechanical.
Pass and get certificate allowing you to take the off-road element.
Again - minumum number of classes and an exam including mechanical (fluids, tyres, changing wheel, etc - ACTUALLY doing them not saying how)
01539624040
Pass the exam and get certificate allowing you to take the on-road part.
Minimum number of lessons before the test required.
Fail either of the first two sections and you have 3 months to retake that section before being allowed to carry on.
Fail that or go over the time limit and you go back to the beginning.
Fail the on-road and you go back to the classroom part.
For the first 12months L-Plate is then mandatory and ANY offence sees you retaking the test.

Or head to Sweden or Norway and try your luck there.....

The car test in this country is a joke and no one will make it more difficult to match what they've continually done with Bike/truck/etc because of the backlash from those who see it as a right that they can drive a car.

isn't a good idea.

another silly response to that point.

There will always have to be some allowances for people physically unable to do certain things and in that case you should still be expected to understand the importance and method of doing something and then might delegate it to someone else if you can't do it yourself.

Quite disturbed by the opinion of people in wheelchairs by some people on this site.

How much do you know about the current test?

Have friends and a partner who passed in the last 3 years and all of them admitted they dont really understand the items in (1) nor did they feel equipped to park in tight spaces (2) after passing their test.

Remember people will learn the maintenance stuff for the test and then it gets forgotten.

Came across a woman the other day in town who was causing a traffic jam as she had just passed her test but couldnt park. Taxi driver was trying to help by shouting instructions out of his window so I calmed her down and helped her. We were chatting afterwards and she commented how she was never taught to park in any space that tight and had come to town to practice. She had a fiat 500 and it really wasnt that tight.

When I'm in my car it IS my responsibility to watch out for the safety of pedestrians and cyclists. I'm the one putting other people in danger.

...which is so much easier IF the cyclists and pedestrians know how to use the road.

Incidents happen when people do something stupid, a driver doesn't look or drives too fast for conditions and equally if a pedestrian steps out at the wrong time or a cyclist rides erratically they are more likely to have an accident. It's poor road use by all users of roads that causes accidents.

I could give examples but for an extreme situation, you would expect a cyclist riding on the wrong side of the road to have an accident at some point. Most people know what side of the road to use, if they knew all aspects of road use from school age it would make life easier for everyone using the road.

[i]You seem to fall into the very category of people who my comments are aimed at [/i]

+1

Plus we have pretty much the safest roads in the world, by comparable country. We must be doing something right.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate

I'm not touching that one.

Probably for the best. (-:

You can be driving round for 11 months with an unroadworthy car in between MOTs.

Hypothetically, but it seems unlikely.

how many motorway accidents are caused by breakdowns?

I don't know. How many motorway accidents are caused by breakdowns?

how many people buy a second hand car that has not been maintained and then get stung for lots of bills?

So what?

I think there needs to be an attitude change away from doing the bare minimum to make sue you meet the bare requirements of the law (MOT every 12 months).

I don't disagree. But if the MOT is insufficient, then the MOT needs to change surely. That's it's raison d'etre.

[i]Hypothetically, but it seems unlikely. [/i]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/picturegalleries/10338932/Top-10-cars-that-fail-their-first-MoT.html

For every car that fails it's MOT it wasn't roadworthy at some-point between its' last MOT and the one it fails - and these are 'new' ones.

I don't agree with the 5 year retests

clarification please, you don't agree with retesting, or you don't agree with the 5 year timescale?

As someone who has taken (and passed comfortably) their driving test in the last six months, in my opinion it isn't up to snuff in getting people prepared to drive properly.
There was very little in the whole process about safely driving to take account of other road users that weren't vehicles. Not that it wasn't in there, just the way its tested means that if you had an instructor who didn't care then you could pass the test and have no concept of what to do around horses, pedestrians and cyclists.

Also chatting away to my instructor he was saying he had some students that could technically pass the test but he wasn't pushing them to do so because he didn't feel they were safe to be drivers yet

I quite like the addition of driving with sat nav as it's an extra thing to think about and so many people go to crap behind the wheel when following sat nav.

I've been driving 40odd years and would have been quite happy to take a retest every 5. I'd take one tomorrow with no preparation dammit. Probably fail on braking distances though.

clarification please, you don't agree with retesting, or you don't agree with the 5 year timescale?

Was that mine? Time scale more than anything if it's from my post.

A retest for every driver every 5 years is just unfeasable for the cost of such a scheme, I find it difficult to imagine anyway that implementing such a scheme would be anyway workable.

Plus I'm not sure our roads are that bad that millions of drivers need bringing in for a retest every 5 years. Professional drivers such as lorries and taxis quite agree there should be more enforced testing.
Retest after accidents is possibly a thing that could work.

I have a low opinion of other people and I suspect retesting would just end up with people behaving for the test and then acting like dicks again afterwards.

Areas I suspect are a problem are medical problems and eyesight which could be picked up by adding a medical and eyetest requirement to the 10 year licence renewal.

I favour education, from school age, about Road Use for all road users and let the problems of older drivers die off and be removed by the medical tests and normal licence renewals.

Roads are going to change over the next 10 to 20 years anyway as someone pointed out.

In order to dispel any doubt in anyone's mind (and thus to increase chances of improved behaviour and successful prosecution), I'd like mandatory questions in the written bit about:

Under what circumstances is it acceptable to use your phone when driving a car?
How much space should be given to bicycles/horses/pedestrians on roads when passing (would need a formal definiotion in the HC first)?
Where should a satnav device be positioned?
What should a driver do when blinded by the glare of the sun?
Why do cycliststs not ride closer to the kerb? 😉

Fairly sure that identifying where fluids go was part of my test.

In the cup holder?

Professional drivers such as lorries and taxis quite agree there should be more enforced testing.

retest is the most important I reckon, most people seem to do enough to pass the test then forget it all. Being forced to occasionally show that you can drive properly shouldn't be a big issue. The suggested 3 month probation for failing a retest seems a bit of a sop, if you [i]need[/i] your licence then, as per those with >9 points, you should be driving better not crying about it after you've screwed up. And yes I'd be quite happy for [i]us all[/i] to do newer revised tests.
Motorway driving is a close second, it's barmy that you can scoot out on to a completely different road system on your own minutes after passing.
Realistic parking spaces.
Staged licence for engine size/HP, insurance only regulates this for poor people, if your mum and dad are minted you're potentially driving a supercar on your 17th birthday.
Making sure vulnerable road user stuff is definitely part of the test rather than [i]possibly[/i] being a random question and [i]possibly[/i] having to pass some on your test. You're definietely going to be sharing the road with some during your time driving

*don't they already? not sure